1993-11-12 - Re: (fwd) Netcom adds access in Denver area

Header Data

From: Arthur Chandler <arthurc@crl.com>
To: Sameer <sameer@uclink.berkeley.edu>
Message Hash: 9b8cd8532de1fa7fc49d43684c9a774bbe24b1793fa412e31378cf22a90fe2db
Message ID: <Pine.3.87.9311111946.A17194-0100000@crl.crl.com>
Reply To: <m0oxoNK-000J5iC@infinity.hip.berkeley.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-12 03:19:18 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 19:19:18 PST

Raw message

From: Arthur Chandler <arthurc@crl.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 19:19:18 PST
To: Sameer <sameer@uclink.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: (fwd) Netcom adds access in Denver area
In-Reply-To: <m0oxoNK-000J5iC@infinity.hip.berkeley.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9311111946.A17194-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



  As someone who has gotten some pretty crusty mail for posting 
issues related to the social and cultural aspects of encryption  -- "stay 
on the subject! this place is about encryption, not politics!" -- may I 
ask -- very politely, of course  -- what these plugs for netcom are 
doing here? I'm using a different provider, and am very happy with them. 
But should I be plugging them (or dinging them) on this list? 






Thread